Contact us today for a FREE no-obligation initial consultation

law done differently!

May 31
0
Bicycle Accidents

Salt Lake Bicycle Accident Attorney

By | Bicycle Accident, Personal Injury Attorneys

Bicycle Accidents in Utah

Bicycle Accident Injuries. There were a reported 15 bicycle accidents in Utah that resulted in the death of the cyclist in 2022. Nationally, bicyclist account for over 2% of people who die in crash involving a motor vehicle according the the Centers for Disease Control.

There are many causes and variations of bicycle accidents. Sometimes, cyclists collide with each other. This usually occurs when bicyclists pass each other. They either do not see each other or they do not have enough room to pass. Sometimes, the accident involves a single cyclist who may be traveling too fast and loses control of the bicycle or it is caused by road gravel or uneven road surface. Other bicycle accidents involve a collision with a motor vehicle.

Severe Bicycle Accident Injuries in Salt Lake

Whatever the cause of a bicycle accident in Utah, the injuries are usually severe resulting in life altering injuries, such as head, neck and spinal injuries, broken hips, femurs and shoulders. Severe shoulder injuries are common in cyclists because as a cyclist falls, they usually try to mitigate the impact of the fall by stretching out their arms resulting in extreme force being inflicted on the wrist, elbow and shoulder.

If you are injured in a bicycle accident in Utah that was not your fault it is critical that you take the necessary steps to protect your rights. If possible, obtain pictures, call the police if you are injured or your bike is damaged, obtain names, email address, phone numbers, physical addresses of witness. Call 801-272-9100 for a confidential consultation with an experienced Salt Lake bicycle accident attorney.

Safety Tips for Cyclists in Salt Lake to Avoid Bicycle Accidents

What Can a Cyclist Do to Stay Safe?

  • Avoid being doored. When passing parked vehicles move away from the parked vehicle to avoid being hit by a car door that may open. Dooring accidents result in severe injuries and account for a significant percentage of our bicycle accidents injury cases.
  • When passing another cyclist, walker, or jogger who is traveling in the same direction, simply shout “Passing on your left, Passing on your right”.
  • When passing a walker or jogger with a dog or child, be aware that children or animals stare unpredictable and may dart out, so stay alert and pass with care.
  • When passing another cyclist who is traveling in the opposite direction on a trail or bike path, move to the right side of path so there is as much distance between you and the other cyclist.
  • When descending watch your speed, pay attention to the road surface, watch for animals and cars.
  • When traveling on the roads and highways in Utah, assume the operators of the motor vehicles do not see you.
  • Use a front light and back light.
  • Where a properly fitted bicycle helmet. If you drop your helmet, you have probably damaged it so consider replacing it if you can.
  • Ride a bicycle that is the correct size.
  • Pay attention, bicycle accidents happen quickly, and accidents can happen to any cyclists.

Bicycle Accident Injuries in Utah Get Help

Contact a bicycle accident injury attorney in Salt Lake at the James Esparza Law Firm for a free evaluation of your case.

We help those who have sustained life altering injuries from bicycle accidents receive full and complete compensation for their injuries, including lost wages, medical bills, and injuries to their body. Call 801-272-9100 and speak with an attorney today.

May 18
0
Best Criminal Defense United States Federal District Court Utah

Best Criminal Defense to Federal Drug Charges

By | Criminal Law

Best Criminal Defense to Federal Criminal Charges!

The best criminal defense to federal criminal charges is a Motion to Suppress. Salt Lake criminal defense attorney Mr. Esparza knows this first hand as he has effectively used motion to suppress evidence for more than thirty-eight years to help his clients fight federal criminal charges.

 Best Criminal Defense to a Drug Charge

If you or your loved one is facing a federal charges you are scared and wondering how to get out of this situation. This is natural. There are options. Don’t plead guilty. Take time to hire a professional federal criminal defense attorney. Most criminal defense lawyers are intimidated by federal court – James Esparza is not. He is comfortable and prefers to work in federal court providing the best criminal defense to federal criminal charges possible to his clients.

A well-crafted Motion to Suppress can be lethal to the government’s case against an accused. A thoroughly investigated and researched Motion to Suppress evidence in a federal criminal case is like a Death Star. If the Motion to Suppress is granted it creates a huge explosion and often it destroys the federal criminal drug case resulting in freedom for the defendant. This is why the best defense to a federal drug charge is a Motion to Suppress.

However, a successful Motion to Suppress requires a skilled federal criminal defense attorney. An attorney like James Esparza. The attorney must not only be skilled but also must be willing to put in the time to thoroughly investigate the facts and to mold the facts to fit the law. Federal criminal defense lawyer James Esparza is the skilled, devoted and relentless attorney you need to succeed in your federal criminal defense. When your future and freedom is at stake call James Esparza for a free consultation.

Number One! The Best Criminal Defense to Federal Criminal Charges – White Collar Crimes

The origins of a Motion to Suppress lie with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 14, Utah Constitution. The Fourth Amendment states that:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizure, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things. U.S. Constitution, Fourth Amendment.

The Utah Constitution, Article 1, Section 14 mirrors the Fourth Amendment, U.S. Constitution.

Federal criminal defense attorney James Esparza has substantial and successful experience in developing persuasive Suppression Motions for his clients. For example, Mr. Esparza crafted and designed the successful Motion to Suppress in U.S.A v. Ralph, Joseph Walker, 941 F2d. 1086, This case is a constitutionally significant case in search and seizure law.

Mr. Walker was charged with possession to distribute more than three hundred pounds of cocaine. The cocaine was found in Mr. Walker’s car. These facts on first appearance seemed hopeless for creating a successful defense. In Walker, James Esparza filed a Motion to Suppress along with a Memoranda. A hearing was held, witnesses were called and after the evidentiary hearing the Motion to Suppress was granted. With the granting of the Motion to Suppress, all evidence collected in Mr. Walker’s case was inadmissible resulting in ultimately in dismissal of the case.

Why was the motion successful? First, a thorough investigation, a well crafted and designed motion. But also, creativity – the use of an expert witness at the hearing. It was creative and a novel way to show how the government violated Mr. Walker’s right to be free from an unlawful search and seizure.

However, the case did not end there. The case was appealed to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals on two occasions and the United States Supreme Court. At each step, Salt Lake criminal defense attorney  James Esparza met the United States to advocate for Mr. Walker and for the U.S. Constitution.

U.S. v. Walker is just one example of a successful Motion to Suppress. The facts in Walker did not look good initially, but through hard work and “dogged determination” a positive outcome occurred.

Elements of the Best Criminal Defense to a Federal Criminal Charges

As mentioned, a successful Motion to Suppress starts with a thorough investigation. In our firm, the investigation starts with our client. We spend hours finding out what happened and asking the right questions. Questions that yield information our client may not think is important but information that is critical to success or failure of the motion. Second, we visit the area where the alleged crime occurred on multiple occasions. Our law firm will examine the area with our attorneys, investigators, and expert witnesses looking for every fact that we can use to strengthen our client’s motion to suppress.

In any successful Motion to Suppress the defendant must establish standing. First, standing matters in a criminal proceeding where the defendant is challenging the admission of evidence. If there is no standing, there is no motion to suppress. Standing is a constitutional principle that is difficult to understand. Simply stated standing is having the legal right to bring the claim. Sounds simple but it is not simple.

In the evidentiary hearing, the defendant must establish standing. This usually takes place through testimony from the defendant. A defendant, through questions, must provide evidence to establish standing. Other witnesses may testify including police officer, and defense witnesses including lay and expert witnesses.

Hire A Competent Determined Salt Lake Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer

If you or your loved one is facing a federal crime, Salt Lake City Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer James Esparza and his law firm can help you. We understand what is at stake and we possess the knowledge, experience and commitment to provide individuals charged with federal crimes with the best federal criminal defense possible. Call today.  Speak with a lawyer. Schedule your free confidential consultation.

Past Results Are Not a Guarantee of Future Results

The descriptions and summaries of the attorney’s prior cases are simply information about the experience of the attorney and is not a guarantee or assurance of future success in any matter. All prior results are dependent on the unique facts and circumstances of the case. Each case is unique, that is why James Esparza will develop a case strategy for each client based on the facts, circumstances of the case and the applicable law.

Oct 27
0
Uterine Cancer & Hair Straightener Use

Chemical Hair Straightening and Uterine Cancer

By | Chemical Hair Straightening, Personal Injury Attorneys

Uterine Cancer & Chemical Hair Straightening Products. What is the Risk?

Women who used chemical hair straightening products were at a higher risk of uterine cancer compared to women who did not, according to a new study from the National Institute of Health (NIH).

The results of the study were first reported in a journal article titled, Use of Straighteners and Other Hair Products and Incident of Uterine Cancer, JNCI J Natl Cancer Institute (2002) 00(0).

The study followed 33,497 women in the U.S. over 10.9 years. The women were between the ages of 35 – 74. During the 10.9 years, three hundred and seventy-eight (378) uterine cancer case were diagnosed.

The study data revealed that women who used hair straightening products more than four times a year were more than twice as likely to develop uterine cancer. Specifically,

  • 64% of women who never used hair straightening products would go on to develop uterine cancer.
  • 05% of women who used hair straightening products would no on to develop uterine cancer.

It is believed that chemical hair straightening products may contain hazardous chemicals with endocrine-disrupting and carcinogenic properties.

Uterine Cancer & Sister Study: Chemical Hair Straightening

The data was derived from the Sister Study that enrolled 50,884 women in 2003-2009. The participants of the study were breast cancer-free women aged 35 -74 years who had at least one sister diagnosed with breast cancer. Hence, the name Sister Study. The participants lived in the United States, including Puerto Rico.

This groundbreaking study is the first epidemiologic study investigating the relationship between chemical hair straightener products and uterine cancer. Previous studies found hair product use associated with higher incidence of hormone sensitive cancers, such as breast and ovarian cancer.

The study also discussed factors that may explain the findings. One factor is the higher absorption rate of chemicals in the scalp compared with other skin such as the forearm, palm and abdomen. It is possible that hair straighteners may cause scalp lesions and burns, which may affect the permeability and thus absorption. Also, flat ironing, blow drying, or other heat processes could release chemicals from the products in higher exposure or concentrations to hazardous chemicals.

Hair Straightening Products & Racial and Ethnic Groups

The study found no differences in the hazard ratios between racial and ethnic groups. However, the authors did note that the adverse health effects could be more “consequential” for African Americans and/or Black Women. This may be due to several factors:

  • Frequency of use.
  • Earlier age of initial use.
  • Harsher chemical formulations.

Information regarding new research into products that may be associated with cancer is important and needs to be widely distributed. The James Esparza Law Firm is involved in a number of product liability lawsuits. If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with uterine cancer and would like to discuss your product liability case contact us for a free consultation. You don’t need an attorney every day, so make the right choice. Call 801.272.9100 or complete our contact form below.

Oct 20
0

THE NEW PRODUCT LIABLITY DEFENSE 3M COMBAT EARPLUG LAWSUIT

By | 3M Combat Earplugs, Talcum Powder

CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY THE NEW PRODUCT LIABLITY DEFENSE

3M Combat Earplug Lawsuits

3M’s subsidiary bankruptcy filing has put a virtual stop to the 3M Combat Earplug Lawsuits. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted fast track review of the bankruptcy court order refusing an injunction to block the MDL litigation against 3M, the parent company of Aearo Technologies LLC. At stake is whether the bankruptcy filing of Aearo Technologies, stops the lawsuits of military members for hearing loss and tinnitus claims against Aearo’s parent company 3M.

What Is the Automatic Stay?

Once a petition for bankruptcy petition is filed, immediately there is an automatic stay against creditors who want to continue or start an action against a debtor or the debtor’s property. The automatic stay arises without a court order. In simple terms pre-bankruptcy litigation against debtor stopes. But what is less clear is what about litigation against an affiliated non-debtor. Is it stayed?

In the 3M Combat Earplug Litigation, 3M is the parent company and Aearo Technologies LLC is the subsidiary. Both companies are defendants in the lawsuits, and 3M is the target in the lawsuits.

MASS TORT BANKRUPTCY OBSTACTIAL

Chapter 11 allows a company to implement an operational or financial restructuring. It is a well-accepted process.

However, large corporations facing mass torts are utilizing bankruptcy of subsidiaries more frequently to stop mass torts claims. In 2021, Johnson & Johnson created an entity named LTL Management. LTL is responsible for holding and managing all the estimated 40,000 talc legal claims of Johnson & Johnson. After creation of the subsidiary, Johnson & Johnson placed LTL in bankruptcy. The Judge overseeing the bankruptcy, issued an automatic stay of the talcum powder lawsuits. The bankruptcy order is on appeal and an opinion from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals is expected soon.

TWO NUANCED QUESTIONS

Aearo’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy appeal will involve two issues:

Whether the automatic stay applies to non-debtors including parent corporations.

Whether an injunction preventing litigation against a parent company where the parent company and subsidiary are co-defendants in a lawsuit is related to the subsidiary’s bankruptcy and restructuring.

SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE

With the Seventh and Third Circuit Court of Appeals hearing important and complex questions involving 11 U.S. Code § 362, Automatic Stay, the final say may well lie with a business-friendly United States Supreme Court. The final decision will have a profound impact on the 3M Combat Earplug Lawsuits and other mass torts cases.

The James Esparza Law Firm practices law differently. We only accept a limited number of clients so that we can effectively represent our clients. Inspired and powered by our clients.

 

 

Oct 06
0
3M Combat Earplus

3M Combat Earplug Lawsuit

By | 3M Combat Earplugs

3M COMBAT EARPLUG LAWSUIT UPDATE

3M continues to search for a way out of the massive 3M combat earplug lawsuit involving over 230,000 military personnel.

Ten jury trials resulted in more than $250 million in damages being awarded to military personnel who hearing loss or tinnitus after use of the defective earplugs.

All 3M combat earplug lawsuits are consolidated through the multidistrict litigation process before Judge Casey Rodgers. Judge Rodgers court is in United State District Court, Northern Division of Florida. Recently, Judge Rodgers wrote in an order that both sides are now highly motivated and committed to developing an efficient and equitable resolution to the lawsuits.

Mediation has been ordered, but there is no news of success.

3M Combat Earplug Lawsuit Bankruptcy

On July 26, 2022, 3M subsidiary Aearo Technologies, LLC filed for bankruptcy protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Indiana, attempting to offload ten of thousands of claims. 3M sought bankruptcy protection as a method to deprive United State military personnel of compensation for their hearing loss impairment. In 2008, 3M purchased  Aearo Techologies, LLC who is maker of the combat earplugs. 3M asked for a stay of all 3M combat earplug lawsuits. They further argued that bankruptcy was the only fair process for 3m to resolve the hearing loss claims. However, Aearo Technologies was defendant in the lawsuits “in name only” and has no meaningful role in the lawsuits.

On August 26, 2022, US Bankruptcy Judge Jeffry Graham, issued an order denying 3M bankruptcy protection through the filing of bankruptcy by Aearo Technologies. Normally, the automatic stay provision of the bankruptcy is self-executing. Meaning it is effective upon the filing of the bankruptcy petition. The automatic stay is designed to preserve the assets of the bankrupt. Undeterred, 3M has asked the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to review the order denying its request to halt the 3M Combat Earplug Lawsuits.

Background of 3M Combat Earplug Lawsuit

For more than ten years 3M/Aearo supplied the US military with the combat earplugs. Military personnel were issued the 3M combat earplugs. The unique feature of the earplugs was the dual side feature. One side of the earplug permitted the user to hear commands and fellow soldiers. The other side of the ear plug blocked out loud noises.

On July 26, 218, 3M agreed to pay the United States of America, $9.1 million dollars for knowingly selling the dual ended Combat Arms Earplug to the United States Military without disclosing the defects. The defects caused the Combat Earplugs to be less effective.

Need Help?

If you used 3M Combat Earplugs while in the military you may be entitled to compensation. Diagnosed with hearing loss or tinnitus? If you have questions, please call James Esparza or complete our online form to get started.

 

Sep 21
0
Breast Implant Alert

Breast Implant Squamous Cell Carcinoma & Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma

By | Breast Implants

Breast Implant Squamous Cell Carcinoma

The FDA recently issued a new information regarding breast implants. The information or alert is the association between breast implants and squamous cell carcinoma. In its September 8, 2022 letter, the FDA warned of the risk of cancer, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and various lymphomas in the scar tissue surrounding the breast implant. At the present time, the incident rate of SCC and various lymphomas are unknown. However, the FDA announcement was based on literature reviews and medical device reports. The literature review showed twenty cases of squamous cell carcinoma and less than 30 cases of other lymphomas. While the medical device reports revealed 10 cases of SCC and 12 cases of other lymphomas. The literature review showed squamous cell carcinoma in the capsule around the breast implants in both textured and smooth implants, and for both saline and silicone implants.

The FDA will continue collecting data regarding the characteristics of SSC and various lymphomas associated with the breast implants. The characteristics the FDA will be assessing may include:

  • Time between the date of the implant to the date of the diagnosis.
  • Age at diagnosis.
  • Implant surface.
  • Implant fill (silicone, saline).
  • Bilateral cancer.
  • Number of deaths per reported cases.
  • Family history.

What Are the Symptoms?

  • Swelling.
  • Presence of a mass.
  • Pain.
  • Seroma, a fluid collection around the implant.

Textured Breast Implants Breast Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma

This warning comes after the July 24, 2019, FDA warning regarding the risk of breast cancer with textured breast implants. There the FDA required Allergan, a manufacturer of a certain type of textured breast implant to recall specific models of its textured breast implant due to risk of breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). As of April 21, 2022, the FDA has received 1,130 medical reports of breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma.

BIA-ALCL is not breast cancer. It is a form of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and the cause is a mutation of a gene which causes T-cells to produce excessive amounts of protein.

What Should You Do If You Have Breast Implants?

If you have no symptoms, the FDA is not recommending the removal of the implant. However, if you have symptoms you should consult with a doctor.

As with any implant, keep a record of the implant including any serial numbers, lot numbers and literature provided by the health care provider. Make a note of the date when and where you received the implant.

The FDA is recommending those that develop symptoms to contact a physician.

The History of Breast Implants?

Breast augmentation started in the early twentieth century with surgeons implanting women with a variety of items, such as crushed rubber, ivory, and ox cartilage. In the 1940’s, women injected silicone into their breasts.

The 1960’s ushered in a new era for augmentation procedures with the arrival of the first encapsulated silicone implant. The Cronin-Gerow implant quickly captured the implant market. The 1970’s brought the first refinement to breast implants. The 1980’s launched an implant with a rubber coating designed to prevent ruptures. Ruptures did decline; however, the implants were firm which lead to a change in the 1990’s to a softer structure.

A seminal event occurred in 1988 when the FDA changed the classification of silicone implants from Class II to Class III. This provided the FDA with the authority to regulate silicone implants and thus required the manufacturers to prove to the FDA that implants are safe for consumers.

In 1993, more that 12,000 women filed lawsuits over complications they asserted were the result of the implants. Over the years the demand for breast implants increased exponentially. In 2021, surgeons performed 365,000 breast augmentations with another 142,000 implants removed and replaced.

Need A Salt Lake City, Utah Breast Implant Lawyer?

If you or a loved one has a diagnosis of breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or other lymphomas, talk to a Salt Lake City, Utah Breast Implant Lawyer at the James Esparza Law Firm. We have helped thousands and we can help you too. Call 801.272.9100 to discuss your legal rights or fill out our contact form.

 

 

Sep 03
0
CPAP

What Should You Do with Your Recalled Phillips CPAP & BiPAP machine?

By | CPAP

If you still have your Phillips CPAP or BiPAP machine you will probably be receiving a phone call from Phillips, manufacturer of the recalled machines, asking you to turn in your device. So, what should you do? Not an easy question to answer.

However, before we get into the meat of this post a little background information is necessary.

Phillips CPAP & BiPAP Recall

Phillips Respironics has recalled certain CPAP OR BiPAP sleep apnea machines over concern that use of the machine can lead to cancer, lung problems and organ failure.

Phillips CPAP and BiPAP are machines that push a stream of pressurized air through an air filter and into a flexible tube. From the flexible tube, the air is pushed into a sealable mask assisting users in breathing correctly while they sleep.

To abate the sound of the machine, Phillips used polyurethane foam to make the machine run quieter. Over time the foam may break down, especially where people use ozone cleaning methods or where the foam is exposed to high heat and humidity. Once the foam breaks down, the foam debris or certain chemicals released into the device’s air pathway may be inhaled or swallowed by the person using the device.  Breathing the chemicals and debris can lead to serious health problems such as cancer, lung problems and organ failure.

What should you do?

Now, what should you do with your defective Phillips CPAP & BiPAP machine? Initially, if you intend to file a claim for your injuries from the use of a recalled and possibly defective Phillips CPAP or BiPAP machine, you must be aware that your Phillips machine is evidence that you could use to establish your claim.  Yes, evidence and whoever possesses the machine has a key piece of evidence. The CPAP or BiPAP

On the other, you should not be using a CPAP or BiPAP machine that has been recalled. The FDA is advising users of the recalled CPAP and BiPAP machines to talk to their health care providers about a suitable replacement.

CPAP & BiPAP Lawsuits

The James Esparza Law Firm is currently accepting clients who seek justice and compensation for injuries that may have been caused by a defective Phillips CPAP and BiPAP.  The firm is evaluating claims for individuals who are contemplating filing a CPAP or BiPAP lawsuit for the life-altering injuries they have sustained.

If you or a loved used a Phillips CPAP or BiPAP machine used a one and were diagnosed with cancer, lung problems or organ failure call the James Esparza Law Firm for a confidential consultation at 1-800-745-4050.

Dec 21
0
Aortic Dissection and Antibiotic Use

Fluoroquinolone Antibiotics Can Cause Fatal Heart Damage

By | Antibiotics, Fluroquinolones

FDA Warns Antibiotics Can Cause Aortic Tears

The FDA has warned that fluoroquinolone (FLQ) antibiotics can cause aortic tears or ruptures.   The condition is called aortic dissection and it can cause uncontrolled bleeding. The aorta is the main artery of the heart. The FDA is now requiring a change of the label alerting users and doctors of the increased risk.  Though there has been substantial controversy over FLQ since the early 1990’s.

See FDA Warning: Increased Risk of Rupture of the Aorta

Common fluoroquinolones are: Avelox®, Cipro®, Levaquin®, Factive®, and Baxdela.

Aortic Dissection: How Fluroquinolones May Contribute

Researchers speculate that fluroquinolines (FLQ) affect the collagen fibers in an adverse way. Collagen is a unique structure and is stronger than steel. It is found through the body in cartilage, blood vessels, muscles and the gastrointestinal tract. (For more information on Collagen see this link: Fluoroquinolones)

Medical studies postulate that FLQ’s such as Levaquin adversely affect collagen fibrils found in Type I collagen.  The aorta is the largest artery in the body and it is composed of collagen with type I and type III compromising the majority.  When the strength of the aortic wall is weakened by a degradation of type I collagen then an aortic aneurysm is a substantial risk factor.

A major medical study titled: Fluoroquinolones and collagen associated severe adverse events: a longitudinal cohort study” the authors found an increased hazard ration of aortic aneurysms of 2.72.  Pathology sections of aortic aneurysm and aortic dissections of users fluoroquinolone users in the study demonstrated abnormalities of collagen concentrations and ratios.

We Can Help

If you or a loved one suffered an aortic tear, rupture or aneurysm after or while using Cipro, Levaquin, Avelox, Factive and Baxdela you may have questions and may be entitled to compensation. If you would like to discuss your situation call 800-745-4050.  We have helped thousands of individuals and families recover from life altering injuries. We Can Help You Too. Contact us Today.

 

 

May 30
0

Talc Powder Lawsuit: J&J, Imerys Ordered to Pay $80M in Punitive Damages

By | Talcum Powder

A recent verdict finding manufacturer fault for cancer-causing asbestos in talc products has culminated with an order for Johnson & Johnson and its supplier, Imerys, to pay $80 million in punitive damages – on top of compensatory damages of $37 million for plaintiff investment banker and his wife –  to make for a combined total verdict of $117 million.

The jury ruled that both companies were aware for years their talc contained traces of asbestos – a carcinogen that’s the only known cause of a rare terminal cancer called mesothelioma.

This verdict in Lanzo v. Cyprus Amex Minerals Co. – which focused on J&J’s Shower-to-Shower product – is important not just for the sheer dollar amount, but also for the fact it is the second such case nationally to go to trial on claims that J&J’s talc products contained harmful asbestos – a fact that was concealed from consumers. Some legal analysts are calling this a “precedent-setting case for U.S. talc litigation.” One of plaintiff’s lawyers was quoted by Bloomberg News as saying this verdict sends a clear message to halt sales of this product, “because it’s dangerous and can kill people.”

J&J is fighting some 6,600 asbestos in talc injury lawsuits alleging use of its products caused ovarian cancer in unsuspecting consumers. This verdict and the subsequent damages awarded  in this case may open up a whole new front of litigation for plaintiffs who allege harm caused by asbestos in talc. The outcome serves not only tarnish the brand, but it’s likely spur more asbestos in talc lawsuits in the months to come.  Read More

May 24
0

Mirena Patients Allege Permanent Blurred Vision, Blindness

By | Mirena

A Mirena lawsuit filed by a woman alleging the intrauterine contraceptive device caused her to suffer pseudotumor cerebri – characterized by severe headaches, blurred vision and permanent 40 percent vision lost in her right eye – is moving forward.

Plaintiff previously overcame defendant drug manufacturer Bayer’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Now, a recently-updated docket in Stanley v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reveals the parties are engaged in various Daubert motion hearings, arguing for submission of their respective expert witnesses’ testimony into evidence.

Daubert Standard hearings are standard in these product liability lawsuits because they rely so heavily on scientific evidence to prove causation and damages. It’s a standard that was adopted into the Federal Rules of Evidence (and soon after by many states) following the 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals. In that case, the court agreed on several guidelines for the admission of expert witness scientific testimony. These include the judge as gatekeeper, relevance and reliability, analysis of scientific methodology and review of illustrative factors.  Read More

May 18
0
anuvia, Janumet and Onglyza Do Not Cut Death Risk, Researchers Say

Januvia, Janumet and Onglyza Do Not Cut Death Risk, Researchers Say

By | Byetta, Januvia, Victoza

Januvia, along with Janumet and Onglyza (two other type 2 diabetes drugs in its class) do not reduce the risk of death when compared to other types of medications to treat the condition.

That’s according to new research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association by scientists at the Imperial College London.

These findings are noteworthy especially in light of persistent concerns that DPP-4 inhibitors (dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors) like Januvia (sitagliptin), Janumet (pose an enhanced risk of pancreatic cancer. The alleged failure of Januvia and Janumet manufacturer Merck & Co. to warn of this risk has been the subject of ongoing litigation. These drugs in particular were approved in 2006 and 2007, respectively, though Janumet has the highest-risk “black box warning” for lactic acidosis (due to the fact that it contains metformin).

Of course, all drugs have risks and those with type 2 diabetes face severe consequences of that condition, so could be willing to take on those risks anyway – but they must be made aware and fairly warned about it so they and their doctors can make an informed decision. Now, this new study suggests that despite being top-sellers of diabetes drugs, neither Janumet nor Januvia lowered the risk of death among patients.  Read More

May 12
0
Invokana Amputation Risk, Surgery

Invokana Amputation Risk Continues Amid Slipping Quarterly Sales

By | Invokana

The risk of Invokana amputation remains a real threat to the increasing number of consumers globally who have been prescribed the type 2 diabetes drug. Manufacturer Janssen (a division of Johnson & Johnson), first received a green light for public sales of the drug five years ago, but even that was only with a confidence vote of 10-to-5, indicating serious safety concerns right from the very start.

National media outlets at the time reported comments from several U.S. Food & Drug Administration members who revealed they didn’t think the drug should be taken at all by patients who suffer even moderate kidney disease. Further, Invokana amputation was almost twice as likely to happen as amputations associated with other similar types of diabetes treatment drugs.

Approximately 7,500 adverse events were reportedly linked to Invokana in just a single recent year. The FDA ordered a black box warning in 2017, specifically for the increased Invokana amputation risk. Black box warnings, you may recall, are those that denote a call to attention for a serious and potentially life-threatening side effect or health risk that has been linked to use of a certain drug or medical device.

But even as hundreds of Invokana amputation injury lawsuits pend in a multi-district litigation action in New Jersey, a recent report by 360 Market Updates reveals investors continue to be concerned about the sharp drop in sales of Invokana over the last year.  Read More

May 08
0
Best Salt Lake Bicycle Accident Attorney

Report: U.S. Knee Implant Market to Thrive Despite Concerns of Failure, Hazard

By | Attune

Knee Implant Lawsuit

Knee Implant Lawsuit: A recent global market analysis concluded the demand for knee replacements in the U.S. expected to continue dramatic growth through 2021, despite ongoing litigation and concerns about early failure and health hazards.

The report, Knee Implants Market: Global Industry Analysis and Market Forecast, cites some of the following factors as playing a significant role in this issue:

  • An aging population in much of the world;
  • Increasing lifespans;
  • More active lifestyles that increase the number of individuals at-risk for knee failure (thus increasing the demand for knee replacement).

As it now stands, the U.S. has the highest share on the market, accounting for more than 60 percent of the world’s knee replacement surgeries and medical devices, with more than 600,000 such injuries annually. One study even predicts there will be 3.5 million knee replacements performed every single year by the time we reach 2030.  Read More

Apr 30
0
invokana

Invokana Amputation Risk Remains High, Even as Study Indicates Lower Cardiac Risk

By | Invokana

The maker of Invokana, the Type 2 diabetes medication that promises to help with low blood sugar, has been the subject of intense scrutiny in recent years, in particular for the potential risk of Invokana amputation, as well as concerns regarding increased risk of heart attacks.Invokana amputation attorney

On the latter issue, pharmaceutical firm Johnson & Johnson is confident it’s going to receive an indication from the U.S. Food an Drug Administration that this top-selling drug lowers the cardiovascular risk (i.e., heart attacks or heart failure). While it’s waiting for that formal nod from the regulator, the company seized an opportunity at the recent American College of Cardiology’s annual scientific session to present an internal study it just completed indicating Type 2 diabetes patients who took Invokana, an SGLT2 inhibitor, were 22 percent less likely to be hospitalized or die due to a heart attack.

However, even if these findings prove verifiable and even if the FDA extends the indication for which the company is vying, there is still the serious and sharply heightened risk of amputations with Invokana.  In 2016, researchers first brought this unique risk to light, reporting Invokana was associated with double the risk of lower extremity amputations than those in the control group. The issue was reported on by several independent data monitoring committees. That spurred the FDA into action, last year releasing a Drug Safety Communication indicating there was an increased risk of both leg and foot amputations with canagliflozin (the generic term for Invokana, Invokamet and and Invokamet XR). Ultimately, this resulted in a black box warning on the drug’s label. Read More

Apr 23
0
Actemra lawyers

Actemra Injury Lawsuits Proof FDA-Approval Stamp Doesn’t Guarantee Safety

By | Actemra

FDA Approval Does Not Guarantee Safety

In an ideal world, we’d all be safe to assume that medications that are vetted and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are reasonably safe for our use because they have been thoroughly tested. Of course, no drug or medical device is entirely devoid of risk, but at the very least, we expect to have a heads-up about any major side effects or complications so we can make an informed decision. But as alleged complications with arthritis drug Actemra illustrate, that’s not necessarily true. Actemra injury lawsuits

Actemra, which goes by the generic name tocilizumab, is an intravenous drug typically prescribed for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Manufacturer Roche explains it works by reducing inflammation. The drug is also approved for treatment of giant cell arteritis, a type of blood vessel inflammation of the scalp, as well as some forms of arthritis in juveniles.

Actemra was released in 2010 after receiving FDA approval. Prior that approval, there was concern expressed in internal debates about whether Actemra could potentially be the next Vioxx, which was another arthritis medication that initially seemed safe and quickly grew popular, but was ultimately yanked from the market by manufacturer Merck & Co. in 2004 amid safety concerns when research linked it to thousands of deadly heart attacks. Some in the FDA were concerned that higher levels of blood lipids that were identified might lead to a risk of heart problems over a period of time. However, those concerns were ultimately overruled when the agency agreed to approve the drug, but on the condition that Roche sponsor multi-year studies to monitor the potentially negative effects. Read More

Apr 18
0
Zimmer Knee Implant Lawsuit

Bellwether Zimmer Knee Implant Lawsuit Loss Has Lessons for Attune Knee Injury Attorneys

By | Attune

A recent bellwether knee implant injury lawsuit was decided in the manufacturer’s favor after an appeals court affirmed an earlier ruling to dismiss for lack of evidence to support causation. Although this ruling pertained to a knee implant made by Zimmer NexGen Flex, it contains some relevant lessons for those pursuing claims for Attune knee implant injuries.Attune knee injury lawyer

In the instant case, one of the main problems was the trial court’s exclusion of plaintiff’s only expert witness testifying that causation (on the basis the doctor’s methods were unreliable because they lacked discernible basis for determining which potential causes of loosening were reasonable and which weren’t). Without that testimony, plaintiff couldn’t prevail on his original claims of defective design or manufacture. It also meant there was a causation gap in his claim of inadequate warning. But to the extent the inadequate warning claim could have survived even without the testimony of that expert witness, the trial court and later the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed, the inadequate warning claim couldn’t prevail in light of the “learned intermediary” doctrine. This legal theory holds that a medical device manufacturer doesn’t have a duty of care to warn the patient who receives that implant about the risks, so long as it gives adequate warning to the treating physician. The basic principle is that it usually isn’t the patient making the decision of which device to choose, it’s their doctor. Thus, warning the patient wouldn’t make a difference in whether that device was chosen over another one. The learned intermediary doctrine is recognized by most other states – including Utah, with precedent-setting cases here in 1984 with Barson v. E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. and 2003 with Schaerrer v. Stewart’s Plaza Pharmacy, Inc.

Product liability lawyers and plaintiffs in knee implant injury cases need to carefully consider qualifications and expert witness methods and how they stack up under the Daubert standard, which is the federal judge’s checklist for determining whether scientific testimony passes muster to be admissible.  Read More

Apr 13
0
mirena lawsuit

Mirena Injury Lawsuits of 2018 Focus Mostly on Pseudotumor Cerebri

By | Mirena

Mirena® & Pseudotumor Cerebri

There seems to be a fair amount of misunderstanding surrounding the Mirena injury lawsuits of the last several years and which cases are currently moving forward. Some women injured by the Mirena IUD in some form or another see attorneys regularly circulating advertisements for people who have suffered a Mirena injury to call – yet they can’t find a lawyer to take the case.

Mirena IUD injury

As our Utah product liability attorneys can explain, the issue has to do with the root cause of the injury and that fact that certain claims have thusfar stalled in federal court, while others are just now being presented.

Initially, injury lawsuits filed against Mirena manufacturer Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals alleged the company failed to adequately warn doctors and patients of the risk of intrauterine migration of the IUD as well as the potential risk of perforation. Plaintiffs accused the drug maker of failing to do all it could to make the IUD safe and to make its warning of the risk of serious and permanent injury clear. Unfortunately, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, overseeing the multi-district litigation (MDL) In re: Mirena IUD Product Liability Litigation, tossed about 1,200 of those cases after blocking all plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, finding them, “unqualified or unreliable,” while conversely allowing all seven of Bayer’s expert witnesses. The judge stated she’d reached the conclusion “reluctantly.” Read More

Apr 03
0

Conflicting Reports on Pancreatic Cancer Risk for Diabetes Drug Patients

By | Januvia

Diabetes Drugs

Supporting research – and pending litigation – alleging Type 2 diabetes drugs Januvia / Janumet are a catalyst for causing pancreatic cancer continue to raise concern for the millions of Americans taking these medications. Other diabetes drugs Victoza and Byetta , also DDP-4 inhibitors, are also alleged to act in much the same way. Januvia injury

Now, in a new study, researchers at Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey have concluded that metformin (an ingredient used in Janumet that makes it different from Januvia) might be an effective treatment in the battle against pancreatic cancer. Metformin is also sold under brand names Glumetza, Glucophage and Fortamet. Note: This analysis isn’t the first to posit that metformin might be part of the solution in slowing and treating pancreatic cancer; that theory has been floated for a while in various research circles. It is however the first that delves into the hypothesis that the diabetes drug can do so by impacting the REarranged during Transfection (RET) cell signaling pathway. In more simple terms, the drug reportedly targets and kills cancer cells, controlling inflammation responses and blocking signaling pathways.

However, we must stress this research is still inconclusive, and the medical community is not in agreement about metformin’s use as an anti-cancer agent. Doctors at the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center published research in 2015, as explained by the American Association for Cancer Research, concluding metformin did NOT improve survival rates of patients with pancreatic cancer. The lead researcher stated his findings underscored the importance of making sure retrospective studies – those that look at rates of pancreatic cancer and diabetes drug usage – are appropriately designed and that new studies are based on solid rationale.  Read More

Mar 29
0

Testosterone Drug Lawsuits Settled by Endo, Glaxo

By | Testosterone, Uncategorized

Testosterone Lawsuit Settlement

More than 1,300 testosterone drug lawsuits were settled following an agreement with plaintiffs and manufacturers, Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., GlaxoSmithKline LLC and its Auxilium unit, according to Bloomberg News. The lawsuits did not cover cases against AbbVie Inc., the biggest manufacturer of testosterone replacement drugs and the maker of AndroGel. However, it will result in resolution of about 22 percent of the testosterone drug lawsuits pending in a multi-district litigation in a federal court in Chicago.testosterone drug lawsuit

Plaintiffs in these cases allege pharmaceutical companies concealed the dangers of these testosterone-boosting medications in their marketing to middle-aged men.

The terms of the deal (which is tentative) weren’t released, but we do know the male plaintiffs in these cases alleged the drug that was made by Endo and promoted by Glaxo had the potential to cause deadly blood clots. A spokeswoman for the manufacturers said the settlement deal will not require the drug makers to admit any liability or wrongdoing. However, it will result in a payout to those individuals harmed by the drug, including those whose loved ones died while taking the drug. Read More

Mar 21
0

Actemra Injuries Underscore Opioids Aren’t the Only Drugs to Fear

By | Actemra

Actemra Injuries

Actemra injuries continue to be reported, while federal regulators and policymakers focus on dangers of other medications. Just a few months ago, a White House panel declared the epidemic of opioid abuse and deaths a “national public health emergency,” which is a designation typically reserved for natural disasters.Actemra injuries

While it’s true opioid abuse is extremely concerning – as an estimated 4 million Americans use opioids and an average of 142 people die daily from overdoses – these issues have eclipsed persistent and serious issues pertaining to other drugs, like Actemra.

Last year, STAT News conducted an in-depth report revealing 1,128 people who had reportedly died after taking the intravenous rheumatoid arthritis drug since it was approved in 2010. However, the agency has shied away from asserting Actemra was causal in those deaths. Even though this is the agency in charge of serving as a watchdog to the safety of prescription medications, it isn’t taking steps to verify those reports, STAT noted. Still, in looking at the individual reports, many of the physicians who submitted those complaints indicated their belief there was no other causal factor that could serve as an explanation. They included cases of fatal heart attacks, brain bleeds and pancreatitis. While many people are aware of the potential danger posed by opioids, fewer know about the risks of seemingly benign medications like these.  Read More

Top